It has recently been revealed what weapons will be fitted to the Type 31 Frigates.

Jeremy Quin, Minister for Defence Procurement, stated in response to a written Parliamentary question:

“It is intended that the Type 31 frigate will be equipped with the Sea Ceptor missile system and will be equipped with one Bofors 57mm Mk3 and two Bofors 40mm naval guns, in addition to a range of highly advanced weapon and sensor systems.

These include a sophisticated combat system with 4D air and surface surveillance, target indication radar and the capability to operate a Merlin or Wildcat helicopter.”

Recently, Secretary of State for Defence Ben Wallace cut the first steel for the first of the Royal Navy’s five new Type 31 frigates, HMS Venturer.

Hosted at Babcock’s facility in Rosyth, Scotland, where the Type 31 ‘Inspiration class’ ships are being built, representatives from across UK and international industry and public service, witnessed the historic ceremony signalling the official start of the build programme alongside employees and representatives from the local community.

Steel cut on first Type 31 Frigate HMS Venturer at Rosyth

The event also saw Babcock’s new assembly hall named ‘The Venturer Building’ – paying homage to the first new class of frigates to be built in the facility.

This vast structure measuring 147m x 62m x 42m is capable of housing two Type 31 frigates for parallel build and assembly activity. It will enable uninterrupted assembly, supporting increased productivity gains through improved access and digital connectivity. The new infrastructure forms part of a £60 million investment programme on the site, on top of a further £100 million that has been invested over the last decade.

Babcock CEO David Lockwood said:

“This is a significant moment. We are witnessing what the National Shipbuilding strategy can achieve. Working with our partners and customers, we are creating something we can all be very proud of. The T31 Class will show the adaptability and capability of a modern warship created with British ingenuity and engineering at its core. I’m looking forward to seeing these magnificent vessels emerge from our newly-named Venturer Building.”

Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said on the day:

“Today is a momentous occasion for the Type 31 programme, Defence and the shipbuilding industry in Scotland. As Shipbuilding Tsar, to cut the steel for the first of five new frigates that will be constructed here on our shores in the Firth of the Forth, providing jobs and innovation to the area, is a tremendous honour. Equipped with the technologies at the forefront of the Royal Navy’s future vision, the entire Type 31 fleet will be fitted with a range of capabilities allowing it to undertake a variety of operations at sea.”

A direct UK workforce of around 1,250 people will be employed on the programme at its height, including 150 apprenticeships, and a further 1,250 in the supply chain. This meets the aims of the National Shipbuilding Strategy, by delivering local and national, social and economic benefits through investing in its supply chain and the next generation of apprentice and graduates, whilst sustaining highly skilled workforces in multiple locations throughout the UK.

The first ship is expected to be in the water in 2023 with all five ships delivered by 2028.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
327 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago

In short, said nothing that wasn’t already known…plus…”in addition to a range of highly advanced weapon…systems”

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

So it’s weapons fit is in addition to a range of highly advanced weapons….umm yes is that what politicians call doubling down on talking Bollox.

Pete
Pete
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonathan

No…your forgetting SA80 !

Tommo
Tommo
1 month ago
Reply to  Pete

How long did that take too get right , Paul ?

Tommo
Tommo
1 month ago
Reply to  Tommo

Sorry Pete bloody predictive txt again

pete
pete
29 days ago
Reply to  Tommo

No Probs Tommo…but indeed. At least the T31 have some redundancy in its main guns. So many of the RN vessels these days seem to have single point of failure risk for critical capabilities…and the SA 80 history is just a reminder that so many things can go wrong, can fail, and usually fail at the time your trying to use them…strangely.🤔🤔

Tommo
Tommo
29 days ago
Reply to  pete

In 89 we had our training with the Army too train and then instruct the Lads on how too use the SA80 ,mags from M16s and balancing a 5 pence piece in the mag for training not the best of starts all that R and D too create a bullpup infantry weapon 1,short conflict back to the drawing board this time with Gun makers &K how much did that cost

andy reeves
andy reeves
28 days ago
Reply to  Pete

UPPERDECK SPUD LOCKER AND CATAPULT RACKS.

andy reeves
andy reeves
28 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

sorry caps key stuck(again)

Will
Will
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Highly advanced weapon systems are probably going to be marketed or explained away as “The Crew”.

To clarify, I am not slating the personnel of the Royal Navy, I just know from personal experience how marketing teams are going to spin this if they ever need to.

Brom
Brom
1 month ago

‘Not enough’ weapons will be fitted to the type 31

Stephen Edwards
Stephen Edwards
1 month ago
Reply to  Brom

Spot on.

Lanre Ihenacho
Lanre Ihenacho
1 month ago
Reply to  Brom

Brief but fair. Compare these with the latest Russian, Finnish or Israeli corvettes!

East Laos Navy
East Laos Navy
1 month ago
Reply to  Lanre Ihenacho

compare to the cost and yeah it’s actually fair
the only question here is about the UK defense budget cut

James William Fennell
James William Fennell
1 month ago
Reply to  Lanre Ihenacho

Those are short-legged coastal defence vessels, don’t have the range or facilities for blue water roles. Not a true comparison.

Bloke down the pub
Bloke down the pub
1 month ago

There’s little point in having the legs if they turn up to a gunfight with a knife.

Max Jones
Max Jones
1 month ago

Assuming their job is it to turn up to gunfights which hasn’t been a role in very high demand lately.

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Max Jones

if the spectre of a chinese invasion of tiawan actually happens we could be fitting phalanx to the gosport ferry

dave12
dave12
1 month ago
Reply to  Lanre Ihenacho

There is a reason why Russia are investing in corvettes rather than large ships ,that being they can not afford replacing their soviet era blue water fleet.

James F
James F
1 month ago
Reply to  dave12

The reason is they have enclosed littoral waters in the Baltic and Black Sea which are best suited to coastal defence vessels.

dave12
dave12
29 days ago
Reply to  James F

Well that cant be sole reason other wise they wouldn’t try keep that wreck of a aircraft carrier going for one example.

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  James F

maybe the t31’s will be at their best working with a squadron of well trained gun fitted archers

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  dave12

the modern corvette ships are warships in their own right. nimble, cheap, low crew needs, less expensive to operate plenty of room for system fits the thai derivative of the batch 2 river is a ship which, could be a serious combatant if need. especially in littoral uses the ship in question HMTS KRABI has been fitted with a 76mm oto melara rapid fire main gun, two additional 20mm canon mounted aft of thhe bridge wings with martlet addition an o harpoon is being looked at, but is unlikely to happen.

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Lanre Ihenacho

we could go all over the river class corvette issue again(not)

Tim
Tim
30 days ago
Reply to  Brom

I think they’re the cheapest frigates we can afford. In peacetime they can do Freedom of Navigation operations and general anti-piracy or aid delivery.

They are large and have the best short range AAW weapons available, so if some missile were fired at them they would have the best chance of defeating it and/or surviving long enough to get out of there. And then it’s not peacetime anymore, so send in a CBG with F35’s and Astutes.

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Tim

well that would deter anybody wouldn’t it?

andy reeves
andy reeves
28 days ago
Reply to  Brom

it’ll be the same old’fitted for,but not with’ rubbish we always get fobbed off with

dave12
dave12
27 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Well buddy keep it really Salisbury was a bad move lol

eclipse
eclipse
1 month ago

This literally said nothing… doesn’t even say how many Sea Ceptor although I think its 24.

Ron
Ron
1 month ago
Reply to  eclipse

I hope its 24. God the T31s have so much ability to offer I just hope that the MoD takes advantage. At the moment she appears to be nothing more than an Ocean Going Patrol Boat.

Sim
Sim
1 month ago
Reply to  Ron

I believe it’s 12.

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
1 month ago
Reply to  Sim

Agree. 12.

Harry Nelson
Harry Nelson
1 month ago
Reply to  Sim

Really 12…. So like Sea wold on T-22 BUT unable to bew manually reloaded at sea.. A step backwards??

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Harry Nelson

No. Sea Wold had 2 directors so could only send missiles to 2 targets. This have active radar in own missile so all 12 can be sent to 12 targets maybe with a second interval to fire each to not have conflict launch.

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Sea Wolf. You are a bad influence ! 😈

Connor
Connor
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

It’s good to know that the T-31 would last 12 seconds in an intense fight before running out of firepower.👌

Tim
Tim
30 days ago
Reply to  Connor

It’s a peacetime picket ship for £250m. Possibly able to shoot down $1.2bn of aircraft. And then it’s not peacetime anymore.

Mick Nicholson
Mick Nicholson
30 days ago
Reply to  Tim

Possibly able to shoot a few incoming missiles costing a few million before it gets hit. Other aircraft are beyond its range. All it is is a tripwire to make an escalation become a war. It is a sentry not a guard.

Ross
Ross
28 days ago
Reply to  Mick Nicholson

Think you nailed it with the “sentry not a guard” part. 100% agree. Though I do think they are fantastic vessels to free up the heavier war fighting ships, and a significant improvement on the OPVs in foreign stations (which maybe a better used in home and European theatres). Plus any further increase in their weapons load would make them even more credible down the line.

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Ross

forward base a couple at gibraltar to assis mediterranian nations to secure the med and maybe at bahrain

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Mick Nicholson

more sentries=more sentrying and ability i think the t31 should have been seriously configured for asw operation around OUR coast the numbers of sneaky russian submarine activities in and around our waters should be addressed forget those slow, overpriced,slow, (none have reached the projected top speed.) to produce, leaky prematurely rusting astutes and get some hunter killers ssk’s built maybe look at the feasability of converting the mothballed trafalgars and swiftsures whi as usual for the royal navy retired too early especially after a billion spent on making swiftsures tomahawk capable. i was talking a few months ago to a… Read more »

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Connor

timely reminder to revisit the unarmed carriers and albiond the news headline of major royal navy ships lost 200 crew and 150 marines and tanks lost. which poor flunkey would have to answe why it was that such big ships were unarmed i’ve always thought that with so big a bow on them the albions could/should have a decent capability to defend itself

Deep32
Deep32
1 month ago
Reply to  Harry Nelson

The renderings that have been published over the last year or so have shown anywhere between 8-24 missiles. So, it’s all just speculation really. We will know how many when we see the first T31 built.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
1 month ago
Reply to  Deep32

It is quite amazing that this has not be confirmed yet given the degree of advertised up-arming on T45.

No real reason to keep it secret?

I can see why you wouldn’t put 24 tubes in. You might not load all of them all of the time: knowing RN that will be the case. Given how light the missile is I don’t think it will require a massive dockside infrastructure to load it – just an ammunition certified jetty…..I know, I know….

Deep32
Deep32
1 month ago

Have to agree, why keep it a secret at all. I think we may see 24 tubes, as you say, not all of them loaded all of the time unless a mission/ deployment requires it.
Either way we should know in the next 2 years or so. Will be something else to discuss when we know.

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Deep32

i’m waiting to see what the REAL COST of a t31 actually is compared to the quoted price.

Deep32
Deep32
27 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Personally I think the true cost will be closer to £400-£500 mill per unit rather than the oft quoted £280 mill once everything is fitted as per RN requirements.

andy reeves
andy reeves
27 days ago
Reply to  Sim

plus a working laser system?

Sim
Sim
27 days ago
Reply to  andy reeves

Not in the near future. It seems it’s easily defeated by rain and fog.

Paul42
Paul42
1 month ago
Reply to  Ron

And that as they say is the problem……..whilst our potential foes arm their ships to the teeth, we just struggle to actually afford to build any new ships and can’t afford the weapons they need……a Russian corvette is better armed than the Type 31….

Last edited 1 month ago by Paul42
Steve
Steve
1 month ago
Reply to  eclipse

It’s really odd that they haven’t confirmed it yet. I wonder if it comes down to them being MOD supplied and the decision hasn’t yet been made on how many will be available after sell off of the t23.

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

The Babcock image above with RN flag have 12 launchers.

Last edited 1 month ago by AlexS
donald_of_tokyo
donald_of_tokyo
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Agree. ALL RN T31 image has 12 CAMM. So that’s the number, unless the MOD-MBDA SeaCeptor contract modified the number.

Models with more CAMM is all for export display, not for RN.

James William Fennell
James William Fennell
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

Yes, the only announced weapons fit has been that included in the Babcock contract. I suspect there are still budget and operational issues around deciding how much can be cross decked from Type 23, how much new, how much in PODS etc. I have a feeling the RN would rather spend on uncrewed systems than an interim anti-ship missile. And speed up development of FCASW.

Last edited 1 month ago by James William Fennell
DP
DP
1 month ago

On forums like this there’s a lot of emphasis placed on the ‘juicy’, main weapons a new ship might use, main gun, SAMs and CIWS but less on the likes of systems such as chaff, flare, decoys and whether the ships might use something similar to the Trophy system to be deployed on the Challenger 3. What fit will be used on the T31 and the T26s? Any specific details on each system? Presume T31 spec won’t be quite as top-end as T26?

BB85
BB85
1 month ago
Reply to  DP

It’s interesting the military keeps its defensive aids capabilities much more hush hush than its offensive weapons, for good reason I guess. Most of the defensive systems tend to be bolt on as they get improved all the time but if you look hard enough there is some interesting info out there.

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
1 month ago
Reply to  DP

The Navy pretty much never talks about armour and missile countermeasures on its platforms as that information could be used to improve enemy missiles and cant be discerned from photo’s.

david
david
1 month ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Whereas a drunk sailor in a bar speaking to a russian woman is a much easier method of obtaining such details. 😋

DP
DP
1 month ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Thanks WZ, that’s a fair point although take david’s point also. The fewer places such details are publicised the better then.

Steve
Steve
1 month ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Also these are designed to be last hope measures and not principle defensive aids. If the incoming mission gets into chaff/decoy range, the other defenses have already failed.

East Laos Navy
East Laos Navy
1 month ago
Reply to  DP

you really can called T26 as top-end if they replace GWS-35 launcher by any better launcher
48 GWS-35 launcher with 48 CAMM missile are only as powerful as about 24 ESSM missile, which can fit in only 6 tube of Mark 41 VLS

James F
James F
1 month ago
Reply to  East Laos Navy

Not sure if that is true – ESSM has 50Km range – is ‘hot launched’.so is confined to Mk 41. CAMM is reported to have around 50km range too – CAAM-ER 60Km+.

AlexS
AlexS
30 days ago
Reply to  James F

No
CAMM is 25km range. it is a 99kg missile.

ESSM is a 280kg missile.

donald_of_tokyo
donald_of_tokyo
1 month ago
Reply to  East Laos Navy

48 CAMM is equivalent to 48 ESSM against incoming sea-skimmer ASM.
48 CAMM is equivalent to 48 ESSM against near-by aircrafts/UAVs.
48 CAMM cannot do much against targets beyond its “20-plus km” range, while ESSM can to something.

It is surely not “CAMM x2 = ESSM”.

James F
James F
1 month ago
Reply to  East Laos Navy

Why is the launch tube an issue? Makes no difference to the missile.

Frank62
Frank62
30 days ago
Reply to  James F

I think it’s that there are no re-loads carried, so if only 12 tubes, the ships won’t be able to defend themselves for long, let alone anything they’re escorting, from air/missile attack. That’s idiotic. 24 should be a minimum,30-50 up to standard. They’re big ships, so arming them so frugally just makes them very weak & a danger to their crews.

James William Fennell
James William Fennell
1 month ago
Reply to  DP

Also the navy talks about a modular capability – i.e. PODS – expect to see modular weapons for ASW etc. The USN even has a container mounted Mk 41 VLS (four per container)!

Expat
Expat
1 month ago

I’d agree and with tech moving fast swarms, unmanned systems and DEWs are all candidates. And if we get it right these systems can be co developed as land systems leading to greater commonality and reduced costs.

Goldilocks
Goldilocks
1 month ago

Nothing new, its always been that fit – maybe news on this would be the number of Sea Ceptors that will be fitted 12 or 24? And if I-SSGW is integrated onboard?. I recommend 16x Naval Strike Missiles to give it a decent land attack and AShM capability (Comes under I-SSGW) and then 24 Sea Ceptor.

Goldilocks
Goldilocks
1 month ago

Also interesting to note, that the Type 21’s, which were designed also as cheap, patrol frigates for export cost £268 million per unit – in today’s money- which is the same as the Type 31 with GFE added. However they had a Mark 8, 2 20mm and Sea Cat – so pretty much ‘equivalent’ Type 31 now but were modified later down the road to have Exocets and ASW torp’s – which I think is the plan with the Type 31, too add weapon systems later on. Mind you, they also then got sold to Pakistan who swiftly installed Harpoon,… Read more »

Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago
Reply to  Goldilocks

You are right in the facts of the approach to cost ,design and light armaments , is very much the same as the the type 21 . but the differences will be Type 31 has a much bigger and stronger hull and much better air defences

Last edited 1 month ago by Bringer of Facts
Pete
Pete
1 month ago
Reply to  Goldilocks

I think it’s really important the project is firstly allowed to deliver what is contracted to be delivered for the fixed price. Prove no specification interference half way through works and delivers on the price promise. Once commissioned and during first major maintenance period add whatever bolt ons are deemed necessary. If initial fit is only 12 then definitely look at adding more CAMM from retiring T23. If no bow sonar then at least provide wildcat with a basic dipping sonar as originally designed and as retained on the S Korean versions. If I-SSGW is destined for T23 initially with… Read more »

Jon
Jon
1 month ago
Reply to  Pete

If it doesn’t get a bow sonar, it’ll be in danger of colliding with the USS Conneticut.

Pete
Pete
1 month ago
Reply to  Jon

🤣

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
1 month ago
Reply to  Pete

Multi task Automonous workboats are the future not dipping sonar Wildcat.
Don’t be surprised to see a remote workboat with a thin line towed array deployed from a T31 providing the ASW coverage. With 2 work boats deployed and working as a team you can triangulate easily to get a position.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 month ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Yes. Gather SEA Krait evidently under RN assessment. Note also marketed as suitable for OPV.

pete
pete
30 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

Interesting. hopefully will come from to fruition GB. Sound like beefed up versions of similar line technology to that I’ve seen in marine / geological survey operations. Seismic Workboat WP960 – Bing video.

Tommo
Tommo
30 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

If your in defence watches , whilst conducting ASW and the SCR is closed up and listening you wouldn’t have too refuel as you would with autonomous Pacific workboats with towed array what is the duration of a full tank of these RHIBS? .Just wondering Gunbuster

Ron5
Ron5
30 days ago
Reply to  Gunbuster

A ribbie towing a sonar array???? Sure (eyes roll).

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
30 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

Maybe an electrically powered ribbie making very little ambient noise? Not such a silly idea. All you need on the ribbie then is a head amp and a transmitter to send the raw product back to mother. DSP is then done on mother. Alternatively you can do the up front DSP and send the fully digitised data to mother. The only thing is do you want to risk the highly sensitive head amp and DSP in a ribbie where someone else could snaffle it. Combines with the 5″ (yes I know T31 is 57mm) ability to fire out sonar buoys… Read more »

Ron5
Ron5
27 days ago

Don’t know much about small boats do you?

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
27 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

Quite a lot: ta very much.

Spent several years just doing small boats.

Ron5
Ron5
26 days ago

OK. Go out in one and try to tow a sonar array. I’ll wait..

Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  Pete

Are not most of the Sea Ceptors from retiring T23’s, are going over to the T26’s, with 48 on each ship? Not sure have new CAMM sets been brought for the first two T26’s? I still think likely to be a shortfall of Sea Ceptor for both classes of ships.

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion x
pete
pete
30 days ago
Reply to  Meirion x

Interesting. When the announcements were first made that the Type 26’s deliveries were accelerating with Glasgow due to be handed over in 2024 that would have meant Glasgow would have been fitted out well ahead of the then (publicly) planned decommissioning dates for Argyll and Lancaster. With Monmouth decommissioned (Sea Wolf fit) and Montrose (CAMM fit) retiring early in 2022 then yes, the potential for the cells to be earmarked to T26 exists, albeit in numbers below the 96 cells planned for the first two Type 26’s. If right we can expect another Type 23 to be decommissioned early to… Read more »

Ron5
Ron5
29 days ago
Reply to  pete

The actual cells or silos won’t be transferred because they are a new design and pretty cheap – just steel. What will be transferred are all the rather expensive electrical control boxes and terminals.

New VLS for T31 & T26 ..

comment image

Challenger
Challenger
1 month ago

Nothing new here! One has to hope that this is the initial weapons fit to keep the costs within budget and enhancements will follow.

Not too concerned with the guns fit but a few more Sea Ceptor and a box launched AShM (hopefully inherited from the T23’s if this interim capability is ever ordered) would be lovely.

For ASW a bow mounted sonar and dipping sets for Wildcat would offer a rudimentary improvement on the cheap.

That guy
That guy
1 month ago

Funny as even 800 tonne Russian Corvettes have supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles!

Andy P
Andy P
1 month ago
Reply to  That guy

Different beasts mate, yeah you can cram a load of weapons onto a platform, even make it go really fast but that doesn’t make it a Blue Water platform, just a local defence vessel. I know we’d all like more ‘oomph’ on our warships but the UK is now all about the global so we need to send ships all over the place, you can’t really do that on an 800 tonne wessel (going all Chekov from Star Trek).

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Andy P

But the relation is important if you want/need to fight coastal vessels like this.

Andy P
Andy P
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

You can’t have a fleet of all singing all dancing super ships for every occasion though, we already separate ASW from AAW for example, while it might be handy to have the quiet hulls of the ASW platforms across the fleet but they cost money. Something has to give and finances will always play a big part.

DJ
DJ
29 days ago
Reply to  Andy P

You don’t need to be all singing all dancing super ship, but you need to be somewhat competitive against the most common opposition you are likely to encounter. If you are planning to be operating globally, such a ship needs to cover a wide range of possibilities. If you look at the SCS, it boasts huge numbers of submarines & most nations OPV’s in the area outgun the T31 &/or carry offensive missiles.

At a minimum, it needs a hull mounted sonar, 24 CAMM, 76mm main gun & at least 4 NSM. You then have a minimal GP frigate.

david
david
1 month ago
Reply to  That guy

You are assuming Russian claims of functioning and effective anti-ship missiles are true.

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  david

Really?! that tech exists since 60’s and the Russians were at forefront..

david
david
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Not disputing the tech. I was pointing out the unreliable claims put forth by Russia.

Paul T
Paul T
29 days ago
Reply to  david

They worked ok in 1967,what makes you think they wouldn’t work now ?.

Goldilocks
Goldilocks
1 month ago
Reply to  That guy

They are for Coastal work you do realise?

IwanR
IwanR
1 month ago
Reply to  That guy

Simple, just get rid of Sea Ceptor and replace it with Taiwanese Hsiung Feng III. Switch one Bofors for SeaRAM and maybe change the 57mm with a 76mm. There you have it, a larger, uparmed version of that 800t Russian corvette.

Expat
Expat
1 month ago
Reply to  That guy

And why would we put a T31 up against them. They have limited range so it would be our decision to put a t31 up against them. We have other weapons systems we could call on like the F35 or as we’d be in shooting war with Russia, other NATO assets. We’ve made a strategic decision to have high-low mix.

Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago
Reply to  Expat

Problem is if WE are forward deploying these then they will be operating in the areas of theses 800-2000t heavily armed corvettes !!

Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago

Let hope some I-SSGW will be earmarked for these ships, Up to now the weapons fit looks purely short range and defensive.

Last edited 1 month ago by Bringer of Facts
PeterS
PeterS
1 month ago

For a ship that is intended for forward deployment often by itself, this weapons fit is seriously inadequate. No ASW, no heavy Anti ship missile and given the latest non statement, perhaps only 12 SAMs. The money to be wasted on a national yacht would pay for a proper level of armament at least to the level of the original Iver Huitfeldts. With so few surface ships, we should not be commissioning anything so lacking in capability. Of course they were ordered literally to make up the numbers so idiot politicians could waffle about maintaining or growing the fleet.They will… Read more »

Max Power
Max Power
1 month ago

12 Sea Ceptor, 3 small guns and no mention of even a basic hull mounted sonar, might as well call it HMS Death Trap. Seriously, what’s the point?

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Max Power

I think the 57mm should be moved to the Type 45 and an heavier gun put in Type 31.

But at least RN finally give attention to guns- the doubt is if it isn’t due to BAE…

Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Lets get them in the water then first refit put the 4.5 from decommissioned T-23 on and move the 57mm to the River B2’s 🙂

Sean
Sean
30 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

The USN is standardising on the 57mm for its new frigates. So maybe add them to the B2s, but keep them on the T31s too – though I suspect the 40mm Bofors would be a better fit for the B2s.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
30 days ago
Reply to  Sean

Which can fit onto the same mount as the 30mm anyway. According to the manufacturers anyway.

DJ
DJ
29 days ago

Off the top of my head, I think you will find that it’s a different 40mm design (ie not a L70 based gun).

Watcherzero
Watcherzero
1 month ago
Reply to  Max Power

Those 3 guns are really good AA guns, the modern 40mm have similar combat performance to the RIM missiles of SeaRam in the AA role and better swarm protection.

Last edited 1 month ago by Watcherzero
AV
1 month ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

👍

Steve
Steve
1 month ago
Reply to  Watcherzero

Not sure they are comparable, since RIM has mid course adjustments. I can see better at swarm, Vs slower moving targets, due to rate of fire.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve

Common denominator for these and 5 inch is likelyhood of smart munitions.

Something Different
Something Different
1 month ago

Where are the SSMs? No real ASW capability beyond lynx? At least there is room for growth

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago

Lynx have no ASW capability. Well except if the sub is on surface.

Jg
Jg
1 month ago

Why on earth isn’t there provision for a Martlet / LMM system ?

DJ
DJ
29 days ago
Reply to  Jg

Why would you bother? LLM off a helicopter – maybe. Off a ship armed with 40mm & 57mm guns, what’s the point? Guns are cheaper.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
28 days ago
Reply to  DJ

And harder to interdict?

Andrew D
Andrew D
1 month ago

You would think with Russia and China playing bad boy at the moment it would be wise to give this Type a weapons platform to take care of themselves ,but we all know what the UK government are like 🙄

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
1 month ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Yeah and they are equally likely to send it to cruise off of Crimea or the South China Sea though I doubt that the Commons speech that follows any potential disaster there will be written until the PM stands up to deliver it. I mean who could possibly foresee the result… a bit like arresting an Iranian tanker in the name of a body who weren’t informed and didn’t want anything to do with it thereafter while leaving your own merchant vessels unprotected. Doesn’t instil one with confidence adults are in charge let alone competent ones.

RobW
RobW
1 month ago

sorry to go against the flow of negativity but these are excellent additions to the RN. Big hull with plenty of space to embark plenty of different systems. Get them in the water, there is lots of time to add additional features.

Andy P
Andy P
1 month ago
Reply to  RobW

Agreed Rob, while I get the desire for more weapons, these are big old frigates with the capacity for extra people and gear, and budget was key in their construction. They’ll do for starters, we can always but more ‘stuff’ on them later, especially as there are a lot more ‘plug and play’ stuff available, I doubt they’ll be getting a big bang stick unfortunately, these will be more likely to provide NGS than the 45/26’s but hey ho….

DJ
DJ
29 days ago
Reply to  Andy P

Some things are an easy add. Like more CAMM or even CAMM-ER, NSM, torpedo tubes etc (at least with a little bit of planning). Other things are actually more expensive if you do it later. eg changing main gun, fitting hull mounted sonar, better radar, etc. It’s easier & cheaper to add if you don’t have to remove perfectly good gear to do so. So unfortunately I agree, they won’t be getting the Big Bang stick for NGFS, which they are the stand out candidate for (I would have settled for the Medium Bang stick as a compromise), but hopefully… Read more »

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
1 month ago
Reply to  RobW

Sense at last!!

No comment necessary otherwise, as this article gives nothing new.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago

I come back from and extended break and wow…
The number of single decimal posters with negative Type 31 comments are… interesting.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
25 days ago
Reply to  Dern

Welcome back Dern.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago

Thanks, I’m not out of the woods yet though, so we’ll see how active I am 😛

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
25 days ago
Reply to  Dern

The usual “drive by shooting” comments which deride then clear off.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago

I was referring to my free time and internet access but yes! Certain topics just seem to draw them out of the woodwork.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
24 days ago
Reply to  Dern

Oh. I’d wrongly assumed health. So all good.

Dern
Dern
24 days ago

Oh ha! No at least my health is pretty decent (though drive by shootings seems to be tempting fate atm).

Posse Comitatus
Posse Comitatus
1 month ago
Reply to  RobW

Agreed. While this article doesn’t really tell us much, I think these ships will prove to be very effective and useful. The arrow of probability seems to be pointing to a sea ceptor fit of 24, the ISSGW that is being procured for the remaining T23’s will no doubt be fitted as well. Given the size of the hull, we can surely expect some provision to be made for a later fit of sonar/ASW equipment. The 57mm, 40 mm and possible 30mm guns would shred any swarm vessel attack.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 month ago

Twelve Sea Ceptor is the only part of the T31 concept I’ve not been able to square. Ample mk41 VLS on the Ivers, so why not more Ceptor silos, even if not all filled with missiles from the start. Still plenty of deck space for SSM canisters, so are the RN leaving the nominal additional VLS void for future missile flexibility?

Posse Comitatus
Posse Comitatus
30 days ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Yeah , I think that the renditions showing just 12 Ceptor silos were just that : renditions. I think there will be 24 silos for Ceptor, and launchers for ISSGW (whatever flavour is chosen). Don’t think that Mk 41 will get a look in as the idea seems to be transferring the weapons fit from each retiring T23 as they are paid off.

Paul T
Paul T
29 days ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Because the whole ethos of the Type 31 is building to a strict Budget and sticking to it – if that Budget dictates only 12 VLS for Sea Ceptor then 12 it will be.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
29 days ago
Reply to  Paul T

Of course ’12 it will be’. A simplistic reposte that does not address the gist of the post, Paul.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

At no point has the number of Sea Ceptor been announced, but the point he is making is: the budget is the hard cap.

Sean
Sean
30 days ago
Reply to  RobW

Agreed, too many whingers who want half the national budget spent on a fleet of 16” gunned battleships… The T31 is a good design with decent armament and capacity to grow, the only real question is number of Sea Ceptor fitted – and that is all based on speculation at the moment as the numbers haven’t been announced.

Albion
Albion
1 month ago

Seems a rather large ship for so little hardware? Why such a small main gun for example? I recall talking to a WW2 AA cruiser ex matlot who said they thought they were well armed until they got into action, then the realised they were not. “Compared to Yank ships, we were undergunned when it came to AA action.”
Is it right to compare then with today? Yes I think so. Weapons may have changed but the principle remains the same.
I await education.

donald_of_tokyo
donald_of_tokyo
1 month ago
Reply to  Albion

Its up-side down. Requirement was for smaller 4000t-ish vessel (with the same armaments). So, the 6000-6500t large hull is just a bonus, good for future.

But, claiming it is so empty is pointless. (although really really understandable)

See T31-RFI pdf.

Last edited 1 month ago by donald_of_tokyo
Steve
Steve
1 month ago

Whilst I get the arguement, I suspect the reality is the upgrades will never come. Budgets will just become tighter and tighter, and having the buzz line of being able to say exploring various upgrade options, whennever asked, will get the MOD/policticans out of holes.

As we have seen in recent history (falklands/Iraq/afgan), capability gaps are only filled when troops die and the media forces the governments hands. With naval assets, it’s kinda too late once the ship is sunk to uparm it.

Only time will tell.

Sean
Sean
30 days ago
Reply to  Steve

What ships were sunk to provoke the upgrade of the T45s with the addition of Sea Ceptor?…

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Sean

Or the Type 23’s.

But more importantly a ship can only be in one place at a time. So in order to maintain commitment a high-medium-low (Darings/Citys-Inspirations-Rivers) mix is needed.

Tommo
Tommo
1 month ago
Reply to  Albion

Hope these can be Specific too the task required like the old Leanders Air Surface, Sub Surface rather than all roled into One the Gap is once again starting to be a highway too the North Atlantic like the good old days sosus is still up and listening, but it’s better too have visible assets as a deterrent . JUST my thought’s

Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago

Wouldn’t mind if the designers had followed the module design for weapons the Absalon Class support (now frigates) ship. They are based on the iverH design have 5” main gun, Stanflex containers that can carry upto 36 x essm and 8-16 harpoons, 2 x Merlins , SBE-90 assualt boats and a flex deck that can transport upto a MBT size or be configured for troops or Med use. THAT would be a useful and effective patrol frigate, even if you only fit 12 x essm during peacetime having the option to easily up arm into a useful LRG escort/ NGS/… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Steve M
JOHNT
JOHNT
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve M

The Absalon may may be the basis for the type 32 I’ve heard somewhere they are looking at it.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  JOHNT

If true that would be very interesting. I can see how you might leave T31 as a patrol / GP frigate and put your heavy assault weapons on T32.

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve M

Frigate seems an odd designation for the Absalon. Wouldn’t a flotilla of ‘combat support ships’ make more sense as a conceptual replacement for the LPDs and LPH?

Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Apparently during last refit they had more capability (ASW i think) added leading to decision to change to a frigate. I think you would need 3-4 to effectively replace 1 LPD in capacity but they don’t have well deck so can’t carry LCU’s having half dozen to support/escort the LRG would free up T-45/T-26 and provide some helo capacity lost with Ocean

Paul.P
Paul.P
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve M

Yes you would need several and with well docks to replace a single LPD. Not saying the Absalon design as it stands but maybe a bit bigger and with a well deck would be an interesting prospect.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Paul.P

I mean, Absalon’s are basically Frigates with mission bays. Closer to City Class than Albions.

Paul.P
Paul.P
25 days ago
Reply to  Dern

Yes; as I understand it they are a frigate with a flex deck and a stern ramp. I suspect the RN are still thinking though what they want from T32 while trying to optimise planned replacement of the capabilities delivered by the LPDs, LSDs, LHDs and Argus. Standardisation does reduce purchase and running costs. Exciting times.

Sean
Sean
30 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

Instead of Stanflex the RN are looking to use their own PODs across the fleet not just the T31. These appear to be based on standard shipping containers which means even the B2s could house a couple.

Steve M
Steve M
30 days ago
Reply to  Sean

so lose helo capability on B2’s for few missiles? I’ve not seen anything in T-31 design to indicate that they can be slotted in anywhere again other than the flight deck? The T-45 have the weight allowance for extra missiles but it is a major refit to be able to use them? the StanFlex bays can be used for other things but if required can have extra module just slotted in to up arm.

Sean
Sean
30 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

The B2s don’t carry helicopters as they have no hanger, and most are forward deployed away from where British helicopters are based. But the space for these is actually beneath the flight deck, not on it, unlike the B1s.

There’s space on the T31… where the Stanflex used to go.

It’s not a major refit adding extra missiles to the T45. The space was always reserved for them and seems to be used as an unofficial gym currently on some. Adding the soft-launch silos for Sea Ceptor will be easier than Mark 41 VLS for Tomahawks.

Steve M
Steve M
30 days ago
Reply to  Sean

Think we all know B2’s don’t have Hanger 🤣 been god knows how many discussions about it on here! If the space is below then unless the new RN pods are heavily reinforced they won’t be able to use flight deck! Sorry didn’t realise we had helo’s based around the indo/pacific area permanently. If the T-31 have space where the stanflex used to be WTF are the MOD reinventing the wheel for the stanflex design is proven to work, i bet it won’t take 30min (thats time need to fit one) to install Sea Ceptor on the T-45? IF they… Read more »

Sean
Sean
29 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

Just checking as you seem so ignorant in your other comments, such as not knowing about the space below the helipad – why do you think they have that crane onboard?… The PODs don’t need to be heavily reinforced, the helicopter lands on the deck not the PODs 🤦‍♂️ Reread my post, that’s my point, we DON’T have helicopters based on the info pacific 🤦‍♂️ Err… maybe because the RN thinks basing something on standard shipping containers is better than the proprietary Stanflex design used by the Danish and… er nobody else 😆 So you appear to believe ships either… Read more »

Steve M
Steve M
29 days ago
Reply to  Sean

thanks for the insults, and the education nice to know that the new pods will magically launch through the flight deck. The whole point in the 30 min is that you could increase the change role/weapon load without needing any refit just a crane which as you say they have. From whats on the RN site PODS will be based around 20’ ISO seeing they are max 2M high apart from Martlet or maybe Sea Venom i cant think of any missile that would fit upright. they could fit length ways yes but then you need to transition them to… Read more »

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Sean

Worth noting that the British Army does have Helicopters based in the pacific, 667 Sqn AAC. And just because you don’t have a hangar doesn’t mean you can’t operate a helicopter, just that the timelines between having to maintain it ashore are shorter.

Paul.P
Paul.P
25 days ago
Reply to  Dern

Good spot. A squadron of 4 Bell 212s. Soon to be replaced by a new ( naval?) utility helo ….

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
25 days ago
Reply to  Paul.P

Was 7 Flight AAC.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
25 days ago
Reply to  Dern

Bet that will throw plenty.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago

Everyone forgets the Army never ceased having a presence in the Indo-Pacific.
Honestly I really hope we get to see Tamar and Spey used like Forth and Clyde are/were in the Falklands, doing Helicopter insertions and exfils from the OPV’s as parts of exercises.
(Also pleased to see that the Batch 1’s are extended to 2028, hopefully 1-for-1 replacements will be lined up then so we have the Batch 2’s and 3’s going at the same time)

Last edited 25 days ago by Dern
Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

Nope. River B2’s have space alongside the superstructure for containerised systems, so you can slot in a UAV/UUV/Missile/Whatever system without compromising Helicopter Operations. You can see the space for them in the attached image (either side of the crane).
Type 31 has space for six TEU’s under the flight deck, no missile container capability obviously, but still space for them.
The Stanflex spaces amidships won’t be used on T-31 for containers since that’s where the Sea Ceptor VLS farm and any cannister launched ISSGW missiles while go.

OPV-395-sm (1).jpg
Last edited 25 days ago by Dern
Steve M
Steve M
25 days ago
Reply to  Dern

Thanks Dern, didn’t realise there was enough space for a TEU, can get the UAV,UUV etc inthe PODS but don’t understand the ‘STRIKE’ entry, TEU’s 20’x8’x8′ and except Sea Venom/martlett can’t think of any Naval missile that would stand up in a 2m box? or would they be looking to do a naval version of the LAND Ceptor truck bed and raise it up to launch? Even the StandFlex pics show forest of tubes sticking out for the ESSMs STANFLEX Modules Standard Flexible Royal Danish Navy (seaforces.org) and they are 3m high

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

I mean there are concepts for naval strike missiles to be fired from containerised systems, but nothing concrete at the moment (pictured is I believe a system using a forty foot containerised system). I wouldn’t hold my breath for Sea Venom/Martlet in PODS, because those have an effective delivery system via Helicopter already. Sea Ceptor maybe because Land Ceptor is already practically containerised.

For now I think PODS will initially be “just” flexible systems like Med, UUV’s, CIC’s etc, rather than sexy lethal systems.

Untitled.jpg
Paul T
Paul T
29 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

Slight correction needed,the Iver Huitfeldt Class Frigates are sort of based on the Absalon Class Ships,not the other way around.

Geoffi
Geoffi
1 month ago

So, bog-all weapons fitted then. Just like the T21….

David
David
1 month ago

“A range of highly sophisticated expansion snd sensor systems”, but no sonar. Pathetic.

Klonkie
Klonkie
1 month ago
Reply to  David

Greed, no sonar is an odd arrangement for a GP frigate. ASW is a primary role, so this is quite concerning

David Steeper
1 month ago

Ok so a lot of you are scathing about it’s armament I understand. Compare it with Russian ships it looks unarmed. So why am I happy with it ? There are two parts to a warships fighting ability first are the guns and missiles yes Russian warships are far more heavily armed but the reason why comes from the second part of the equation. The guns and missiles depend on the ships sensors and fire control to hit there target. Russian sensors and fire control are at least a generation behind western counterparts. To put it bluntly they need to… Read more »

Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Happy to get the extra hulls but i don’t care how wonderful the radar etc i, with only 12 missiles and no reloads on day 2 of any conflict and the crew will be BOHICA, whether that be Russian/chinese or Irainian they would shoot damm site more missiles than 12 and that would be followed up by just plain dumb bombs and they won’t worry about a 57mm and couple of 40mm guns 🙁

Bringer of Facts
Bringer of Facts
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

IMHO a frigate size ship should be able to engage similar size or larger warships, the idea that Type 31 is purposed for ‘Low-intensity’ conflict is nonsense. What would happen if hostilities broke out and a type 31 found itself in the same location as a hostile surface vessel with long-range Ashm or even a submarine ?

Tommo
Tommo
1 month ago
Reply to  David Steeper

Dave,just like the Ruskies during the Soviet era lots of all singing and dancing Weapon systems looked frightening so visible but like you stated ,they were unable too engage more than one threat system overload

David Steeper
1 month ago
Reply to  Tommo

👍

Christopher Smith
Christopher Smith
1 month ago

Can anyone tell me who paid for the new assembly hall at Rosyth for the type 31s ? Was it the UK taxpayer or was it the Scottish government ? either way is not a private company (Babcock) being effectively subsidised by public money no doubt Babcock are paying a peppercorn rent or lease on this building to make it legal but is it morally acceptable?

Paul T
Paul T
29 days ago

A wild guess on my part – through the UK Govt contract to Babcocks, awarded through the MOD,so in effect the UK Taxpayer.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 month ago

Lots of comparison with the type 21, but the T31 is really a fundamentally different type of ship, the 21 was never really designed for the RN or a blue water navy, it was a cheap brown water navy patrol frigate designed for benign enclosed seas that would appeal to North African and Middle Eastern allies. With its low range, fragile hull and lack of any real growth space. The 31 is probably more a modern version of the leopard class, focused gun armament, long range patrol vessel, with plenty of potential for growth. designed to be operated by a… Read more »

Klonkie
Klonkie
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Although the Leopards were primarily for air defence?

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 month ago
Reply to  Klonkie

Yes but not in the same way as a carrier group escort, They were essentially designed to protect commercial shipping against surface raiders, lower end air threats and to cruise long distances, So a really very close to a T31s likely role.

Klonkie
Klonkie
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonathan

cheers mate – thanks

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonathan

it was a cheap brown water navy patrol frigate designed for benign enclosed seas that would appeal to North African and Middle Eastern allies.

Well if you are in brown water you have much more chances of getting enemy aircraft attacking than in middle of Atlantic Ocean.

Type 21 was done for Atlantic Ocean. But the overall problem is that Seacat was a failure. If put a Type 22 with a Seacat and would be failure too.

That guy
That guy
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

The only thing SeaCat could take out was a large, subsonic missile flying in a straight line at you, so I see your point

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  That guy

It could not stop aircraft like A-4, Daggers, MB-339s with dumb bombs i doubt it could take a missile.

AlexS
AlexS
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Maybe a big fat slow SS-N-2C Stix.

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
28 days ago
Reply to  That guy

In a very straight line.

But only if it was very, very, very big and slowed almost to a stop.

It was great against prop drones where the operator was having a doze.

Sopwith Camel: no problem.

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 month ago
Reply to  AlexS

Hi Alex, the T21 had real issues with open oceans, to the point it needed a good deal of structural work undertaken to manage the Atlantic. It was always designed as an export frigate for brown water navy’s. It was never really intended as an open ocean escort, it could not do ASW or AAW in the role of escort. It was designed as a EEZ patrol frigate for the South American, North African and Middle Eastern market. With SeaCat, It’s important to remember context as well in the 1960s when amazon was designed and it’s keel laid, sea cat… Read more »

AlexS
AlexS
30 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Vospers got exported and reportedly the Brazilians are happy with bigger derivative Niteroi – Some are still in service and were updated. Some will reach more than 50 years old in service.

The problem is that British industry sometimes were genius = Harrier.
Other times they design things too heavy, too complicated: there is no reason for a system for Sea Wolf a 100kg missile to be so heavy and big.

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago
Reply to  AlexS

Yes the Mk10 was a far better sized ship that the T21, that extra 600tons and 20 meters made all the different to having capacity to be modernised.

AlexS
AlexS
30 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Yeah, but Venezuelans and Peruans just a bit up north still have their Lupos modernised which are about same Type 21 size.

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago
Reply to  AlexS

Really good ships the Lupos, very well balanced surface combatants and light escorts. It’s was one of those ships that was just very good at a time the Italian warship industry was probably the best in Europe. It is worth remembering the Lupe was a 1980s frigate that was still being built in the 1990s so it’s a decade more modern that the T21. But simply put it was a better balanced ship all around than the T21.

AlexS
AlexS
29 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

The order for Lupos was in 1970. First was laid down in 1974. 18 that were build (only 4 for Italy) were laid until 1983, the last 4 were for Iraq and never arrived there. Appears there was a 5 year difference. Wiki says first Type 21 was laid in 1969. I think the issue with Type 21 was the space management for weapons. Choosing the Seacat which was a very lightweight launch system, mean that nothing RN had could have replace it in that place. Being in top of the hangar means no cabinet could be below , so… Read more »

Last edited 29 days ago by AlexS
Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 month ago

Principal’s basically sound. Have platforms you can turn ou quickly for a reasonable price. Produce them to a size that offers decent range and flexiblity, together with a relatively rapid systems upgrade capability dictated by evolving risk.

Robert Blay.
Robert Blay.
1 month ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Well said. It seems most don’t understand the concept behind these vessels. Especially the business model.

Challenger
Challenger
1 month ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

So long as of course they see some capability enhancements one day and aren’t left ‘fitted for not with’ a whole host of extra kit.

Deep32
Deep32
1 month ago
Reply to  Challenger

Which is where the idea of kit in PODS is coming from, and that the MOD are pushing this idea hard.
Personally not entirely sure this is the best way to go, but seems to be the current flavour of the month.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 month ago
Reply to  Challenger

I believe the fundamental paradigm shift from our post Cold War dreamtime is the resurgence of Russia and, of likely more relevance, the emergence of China. The luxury of being able to commission vessels either too small or FFBNW for their active lives will be effectively vetoed by these two. The Shipbuilding Strategy and recent announcement on the Type 45 indicates the enforced direction of travel. Additionally, the UK moves to demonstrate sustained multilateral engagement is of course a predicated requirement of both the OPV2s and T31s in the influence realm. With even the US fearing an inability to compete… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
1 month ago
Reply to  Gavin Gordon

Yes the really important bit is getting the right hull at the right price for a blue water navy like the RN, with plenty of growth. Better a larger hull with more range and growth than a smaller hull with more more weapons and limits on growth and deployment due to range and hull construction.

Gavin Gordon
Gavin Gordon
1 month ago
Reply to  Jonathan

It seems the United Kingdom is still expected to ‘lead’ on influence internationally. From the perspective of a native, perhaps it is difficult for us to envision this. We know we’re a small territory which struggles with financial issues and nowadays self-flagellates over a past that, contrarily, both cannot be undone & perhaps contributes to my opening postulation. Though I actually think that it is our taken-for-granted democratic processes – way from ideal though they are – that may be the decisive fsctor, and that many may thus wish to take heart from and emulate. On that basis, in the… Read more »

Stephen Edwards
Stephen Edwards
1 month ago

Massively undergunned. Sending our sailors out in these against Russian or Chinese equivalents which are armed to the teeth with anti-ship misfiles, torpedoes, guns and cannons is a crime. When will the MoD ever learn. Made the same mistake in the 30s.

Rob
Rob
1 month ago

Notice didn’t say how many Sea Ceptor missiles or whether or not the ships eventually gets an anti-ship missile system.

This is important because a warship that can only defend it’s self but poses no threat actually isn’t a warship.

Armchair Admiral
Armchair Admiral
1 month ago
Reply to  Rob

BUT…it has a 4D radar, so it can not only see side-side and up and down….but in time as well! Or is my understanding of 4D flawed?
Usual press release. Absolutely no hard facts but lots of, well, nothing really.
Needs sonar, but with 24 sea Ceptor and the gun fit, a great carrier goalkeeper.
AA

Steve
Steve
1 month ago

If you want to get a good track, you would need the time component to understand how fast it’s moving, and not just where it was at a specific moment in time. No idea if that is what the 4D stands for though.

Daveyb
Daveyb
30 days ago
Reply to  Steve

It just PR. As a 4D radar it provides range, bearing and slant range along with the tracks velocity worked out from the doppler shift. All military pulse doppler radars since the late 80’s are 4D radars.

criss whicker
criss whicker
1 month ago

Was this not the ship that was to give her enemies a broad side.
or was this another ship?
still surley even a basic ship should be able to protect itself and give as good as it recieves, but we seem to be building ships that look impressive . yet are defenceless,

being an amature interest at this, im sure you will put me straight…..mmmmm

Tommo
Tommo
1 month ago
Reply to  criss whicker

Last broadside HMS London dec10th 1981 last deployment prior too big sold to Pakistan not quite Iowa class though

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
29 days ago
Reply to  criss whicker

This isn’t for facing down China, it’s for facing down Iran, horses for courses.

criss whicker
criss whicker
1 month ago

sorry chaps [ surely ] mmmmmwe all make em…lol

coll
coll
1 month ago

So, still no mention of the LaWS that will be deployed on ships?

Jason M Holmes
Jason M Holmes
1 month ago

Basically Coast Guard cutter plus some Sea Ceptors, great !

Frank62
Frank62
1 month ago

Good AA/anti-missile fit out(Though if Sea Ceptor numbers are too low it’ll be easily overwhelmed). Negligable anti-ship or NGS. Negligable ASW unless a Merlin embarked. Great anti-small boat. Great way to reopen the can of worms on the T31s armament! Nothing we didn’t already know.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 month ago

I’m expecting a more war worthy fit in the future, but for now they seem suited to keeping the Revolutionary Guard and other pirates off our merchant fleet.

Jason M Holmes
Jason M Holmes
1 month ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

Especially with what the Chinese are fitting to every warship, big or small, this is going to be hopelessly outmatched if it leaves any layered protection of other warships in any situation short of fishery protection

eclipse
eclipse
1 month ago
Reply to  Jason M Holmes

This isn’t meant to go up against China. It’s meant precisely to be in lower end environments such as the Gulf. I’m also guessing it will end up better armed; just building it like this so it stays within budget then adding weapons on refits; most likely ISSGW from the Type 23s and I would like to see some Martlets added for extra anti-small boat defence.

Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago
Reply to  eclipse

If going to replace the forward deployed B2’s then the indo/pacific will def be sent on regular trips through South China Sea just to annoy them

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

In fairness, you could send a Type 26 with it’s Mk41 bristling with ASM’s and it’s SeaCeptor VLS fully packed, and it still wouldn’t stand a chance if something turned hot in the SCS. So let’s get some perspective when people freak about fwd deploying things. If an Escort is in the SCS and war breaks out 1 of 2 things will happen: 1) It hides, and retreats until it meets up with an RN/Allied CSG, and then returns. 2) It gets sunk in a one sided engagement. Just one of those things to think about. (Mind you Type 31… Read more »

Steve M
Steve M
25 days ago
Reply to  Dern

true, i bet when they are hiding they would wish they had few extra. I just personally like the STANFLEX idea, have the 5 bays, peace time just have 1 with missiles the other 4 used for extra Aid stores (or a gym) but if things start looking dodgy the option to head to friendly port, C-17 could fly 4 Stanflex modules and a crane within few hours of ship arriving could be loaded with 36SAM and 16 AShM to assist in CSG / RFA protection in close and backup T-45’s allowing T-26 to move away from freindly noise to… Read more »

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Steve M

Point being if you have an escort with 12-24 Sea Ceptor vs one with 48 Sea Ceptor and it gets found by the Chinese in a hot war in the SCS on it’s own it won’t make a difference, it just won’t survive. The dynamic isn’t “Do I have enough missiles to survive if I get found.” it’s “If I get found I’m being sunk, because I am a single escort and the enemy has an entire navy and air force close to hand.”

Nigel Collins
Nigel Collins
1 month ago

“in addition to a range of highly advanced weapon and sensor systems.”

The UK’s Ministry of Defence (MOD) says it plans to spend “up to” £130 million developing three new directed-energy weapons – including both laser and radio-frequency systems.

https://optics.org/news/10/7/20

MODweaponsJuly2019.jpg
Barry Larking
Barry Larking
1 month ago
Reply to  Nigel Collins

Precisely. However, don’t disturb the toy shop by mentioning A.I., sub surface and aerial drones and other ‘advanced systems’.

Tomartyr
Tomartyr
1 month ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

Very true.
This could be the new standard for warship design, minimum armament on the ship itself and full capability being achieved with containers, drones and helicopters that can be easily swapped out.

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
1 month ago
Reply to  Tomartyr

We are seeing a step change as great as any since gunpowder. This presents challenges for doctrine and our whole defence posture. Building what we are used to now could mean that in two or three years our forces are like the brave Poles attacking tanks on horseback; heroic but futile. I never read much on this forum’s comments about the impact of 3D printing, virtual reality, or much beyond this or that kinetic weapon fit. That said, my reading of conflicts since the year dot underlines the essential factor in successful prosecution of intentions so often is people, morale,… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Barry Larking
Daveyb
Daveyb
30 days ago
Reply to  Barry Larking

Both the RAF and RN have heavily invested in 3D printing. Both carriers have “plastic” 3D printers, they have yet to get a metal 3D printer. Though I know there’s a certain unit within the RN that have one, which is being used for testing. 3D printed parts have been used on aircraft since 2015, when they were certified for use by the CAA/MAA. However, the plastics that can be used are the expensive, such as Ultem sue to its structural stability and flame resistance. Some of the carbon fibre based plastics may be certified soon, as they have been… Read more »

Barry Larking
Barry Larking
29 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Many thanks. I believe I read something about that here awhile ago. I was simply making the point that the implications are that this and other technologies are proceeding at such a rapid pace much of what we think of in material equipment and doctrine today is being overtaken very rapidly.

Lanre Ihenacho
Lanre Ihenacho
1 month ago

The Danes with their five praiseworthy Absalon and Iver Huitfeldt frigates, reduced build costs by recycling sensor and weapons suites retrieved from older decommissioned vessels. Is the RN unable to up arm these new ships with the best assets from the outgoing but recently upgraded Duke Class? What is their sonar and ASW capability if no Merlin embarked or it’s unavailable? Why is no there no effective ASuW armament ? They seem hardly more potent than the River class as things stand, and at some point, by Sod’s law, it’s guaranteed they’ll be expected to fill in on carrier escort… Read more »

Last edited 1 month ago by Lanre Ihenacho
Quentin D63
Quentin D63
1 month ago
Reply to  Lanre Ihenacho

Good sense comments Lanre. We could pinch 32 second hand silos off the Monmouth and maybe another 32 off the Richmond to cover the additional 5×12 = 60 silos if not being used already and if these ships won’t get upgraded.

Paul T
Paul T
1 month ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

HMS Monmouth looks like a good spares donor if it’s Sea Wolf VLS Tubes are of any use,but HMS Richmond has a few good years in RN Service yet,she’s not long out of Refit plus she has had the PGMU Upgrade too.

Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  Paul T

Paul, the Sea Wolf missile is no longer supported. A bit like Windows 7!

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion x
Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

The old Sea Wolf hot launch silo tubes were removed from refitted T23’s with CAMM.
CAMM is contained in its own canister. It is cold launched by gas.
The mushroom bit was welded on deck because CAMM is longer than SW.

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion x
Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  Lanre Ihenacho

“…up arm these new ships with the best assets from the outgoing but recently upgraded Duke Class?”

That is actually the plan. To move over Sea Ceptor from retiring T23’s frigates to new T26’s and T31’s. New sets of CAMM should of been brought for the first two T26’s.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Lanre Ihenacho

They are?
Sea Ceptor is being retrieved from the Duke’s and fitted to both Inspirations and City classes, just with a pre-ponderance for the City’s (City Class: 48 Sea Ceptor launchers, Duke Class: 32).

And uh…
57mm with smart munitions,
2x40mm
12-24x Sea Ceptor
Wildcat with SeaVenom/Martlet/Stingray
Probably ISSGWx8
9000nm range
6 TEUs
3 Boat Bays
vs
1x30mm
5000nm range
2 TEU’s
2 boat bays

“Hardly more potent than a River.” Yeah….about that.

Trevor W Hogg
Trevor W Hogg
1 month ago

So first in the water by 2023 and all completed and delivered by 2028 thats only 6 yrs, compared to the Type 26, not too shabby

East Laos Navy
East Laos Navy
1 month ago

space for 24 GWS-35 VLS with 24 CAMM missile could be replace by 16 SYLVER VLS with 64 CAMM missile, there’re addition space for 8 antiship missile and 4-6 anti-submarine torpedo tube, the flexible mission bay place under flight deck can fit with 4 heavyweight torpedo tube still, the current missile module and 2 foward boat bay could be replace by another module for 32 SYLVER VLS with 16 Aster 30 Missile & 64 CAMM missile, and 8 antiship missile there’re many option to upgrade Type 31 firepower, but remember that Type 31 is a type of lowcost frigate, so… Read more »

Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  East Laos Navy

SYLVER VLS cells cost as much as Mk. 41 cells at £millions for a set of 8! Sea Ceptor (CAMM) is cheap at £100k’s, launched from single cells costing only about £10k. RN could fill a lot more cells with CAMM on a T31 for the price of SYLVER set.
You should only fill your very expensive hot launch cells, with very expensive missiles like Aster 30!

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion x
Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  East Laos Navy

And… how would you pay for a SYLVER VLS launcher please?

Tim uk
Tim uk
1 month ago

We have a navy that seemingly doesn’t want to play sink my battleship. Maybe the RAF should follow suit and only equip Typhoons with bombs ?

eclipse
eclipse
1 month ago
Reply to  Tim uk

That’s not the point. We’re finally arming our Type 26s properly, and we’re refitting the Type 45s to carry 48 Aster 30 and 24 CAMM. Type 31 will probably receive the 5 ISSGW sets from Type 23, type 45 might actually get its 16 Mk41 VLS cells to carry FC/ASW (though maybe it won’t be feasible due to short lifespan left), and Type 83 will, looking at the Type 26, probably be similar to a Tico.

Paul T
Paul T
1 month ago
Reply to  eclipse

The Type 26 has the potential to be well Armed, but that is dependent on how generous the Treasury/MOD is in deciding what to put in the MK41 VLS.

Lusty
Lusty
1 month ago
Reply to  eclipse

CAMM’s going where the MK41 cells are on a T45. I’m not trying to sound rude, but I can’t see them fitting one to rip it out for MK41 after what would be only a few years’ service.

eclipse
eclipse
1 month ago
Reply to  Lusty

Oh, wait, really? I thought the Mk. 41s were meant to go behind the Asters.

Lusty
Lusty
29 days ago
Reply to  eclipse

Nah, they’re going in the gap between the gun and the current silo. That’s the space for the Mk41 cells, or at least, the intended space. The Mk41 gym currently occupies the space and by the sounds of it, the space will still be (partly) occupied by the gym after Ceptor’s fitted.

Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

Isn’t it just that the ceiling will be much lower in the gym once Ceptor goes in?

Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

The T45’s don’t have any Mk. 41 cells fitted in them. Just the space for them, party filled with a gym.

Lusty
Lusty
29 days ago
Reply to  Meirion x

Yes, my bad. By ‘cells’ I meant space.

I’m fully aware of what they’re armed with and what they’re not armed with – I have been in there often enough!

Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  eclipse

There is No space for both CAMM and Mk. 41 on a T45.

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago
Reply to  Tim uk

All our ships will have plenty of Seaceptor and anyone hit by a Seaceptor going at over three times the speed of sound is not going to have a good day. The kinetic energy of an almost hypersonic missile is staggering ( I did work out the kinetic energy in a Brahmos at Mach 3 and it was the same order of magnitude of an intercity 125 going full pelt). Added to the a Rotor filled with joy. You have to remember you don’t need to sink a ship, just stop it from doing what you don’t want it to… Read more »

Goldilocks
Goldilocks
1 month ago

I hear we plan to test lasers in the future on Mastiff and frigates, hopefully Type 31 could receive them!. Also people must remember the Type 31’s aren’t to sail into the SCS in wartime, there more for the Persian Gulf were there guns would come in handy against those Iranians FAC’s – there also meant to replace River B2’s on station, allowing them to come home and fufill fishery protection duties!

Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago
Reply to  Goldilocks

There are B2’s (or will be soon) heading to Asia area which will include SCS surely? We don’t have enough T-45/26’s to protect both CSG’s AND an LRG which would also need NGS so you either reduce CSG defence or don’t protect the booties? putting extra (36) sea ceptor and 4.5 on the T-31 would allow it to provide close support and NGS to the LRG or be used as goalkeeper for QE class

Goldilocks
Goldilocks
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve M

I doubt the Type 31 would accompany Carriers unless they were the Carribean or something, but they would make a useful escort for LRG, meaning the big guns (Type 45/26’s) can escort QEC and POW.

A preferable compostition for LRG is:

  • Albion
  • Two/One T31’s
  • One T45
  • Wave-class
  • Minehunters

Whilst a CSG peactime force woul probably consist of

  • Carrier
  • Two T45’s
  • Two t23’s/t26’s
  • Tide-class
  • Fort II class/FSS
  • 1 Astute-class
  • Other nations destoyers/frigates
  • potentially minehunters
Steve M
Steve M
1 month ago
Reply to  Goldilocks

large assumption that we would have 5 operational T-45’s!!

that guy
that guy
1 month ago
Reply to  Steve M

That list would make 3 if my maths is correct, which should be good enough once PIP is done

Steve M
Steve M
30 days ago
Reply to  that guy

2x t-45 x 2 CSG’s (4), 1 t-45 x 1 LRG (1) makes 5 ? 1 x T-45 in refit = total 6, 2x T-26 x 2 CSG’s (4), 2 x T-26 on ASW/deterrence protection, 2x T-26 in refit = total 8 leaving 5 x t-31 = 3 x fwd deployed, 1 with LRG (not much point as can hardly defend itself let alone LPD & LSG and not against Subs (nor can the T-45) and 1 x T-31 in refit, B2’s doing UK patrol doesn’t leave much contingency or availability for NATO duties

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago
Reply to  Goldilocks

I do think the Rule for three is going to hammer deployment plans for a bit, one on task, one working up or coming home and one in refit. Yes the RN often gets more sweat from its ships that that, but there is a reason CASD needs four hulls to guarantee a continuous deployed sub. The reality is that the 6 T45s will only reliably generate 2 hulls for the Carrier and that’s it. They may squeak one more occasionally but that’s asking a lot. With the tails 8 hulls should easily generate the 2 needed for the carrier… Read more »

Ron
Ron
1 month ago

I have seen most of the posts about the weapons fit and in many ways I agree the T31s seem to be a bit light on weapons. However this is what was possible with the budget. It does not mean to say this is how the T31s by 2040 will look. Lets look at possibilities that the MoD has of upgrading the T31s without breaking the bank. To achive this I need to make some assumtions, about our future build, first is that the T26 will be nearly all new equipment/weapons and sensor suites. The second is that the T83… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago
Reply to  Ron

To be honest Ron I would say the mood music is all about increasing the lethality of the ships the RN, have so it would not surprise me at all if the T31 enters services with 24 Seaceptor and even at a stretch some form of dedicated ASuW missile, maybe even spear 3 which would be ideal for the sort of engagement these ships would likely end up in ( enclosed crowded seas).

Meirion x
Meirion x
30 days ago
Reply to  Ron

“That all 13 of the T23s have bow mounted sonar type 2150,”

No, not all T23’s will get it Ron. Existing T23’s have bow sonar type 2050.
Only one T23 has been refitted with new sonar 2150 so far, and only 5 or 6 that get LIFEX will receive it.

Last edited 30 days ago by Meirion x
Ron
Ron
30 days ago
Reply to  Meirion x

Thanks, Meirion X, I was trying to find that info.

Daveyb
Daveyb
30 days ago
Reply to  Ron

I wouldn’t be to hasty in getting rid of the 57mm gun. In most respects it is a better and more flexible weapon system than the 40mm, For starters it can use the guided ORKA round, plus it has a longer effective range and the HE rounds carry twice the punch. If anything and if the Treasury cough up the cash for a BAe Mk45 Mod 4 5″ gun. Then yes I’d have the 57 replaced in the A position with a 5″, but move the 57 to the B position. I would also replace the 40-mm on the hangar… Read more »

Ron
Ron
30 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

Hi Daveyb, I agree in many ways I like the 57mm/40mm combination. I also agree if money was not an option then in the future the BAE 5in gun could replace the 57mm. I was looking at possibilities with cost constraints and using equipment that is available. For example is it a good use of the 5in gun on the T26? The T26 will almost always be working with the carrier group where as the T31 will be an independent command or work with an Amphibious group. Is there life left in the 4.5in and the stored ammo for the… Read more »

DaveyB
DaveyB
1 month ago

At DSEI 2021 this year, Babcock showed a model of a T31/Arrowhead 140 with a number of armament configurations. There were a number of Babcock spokespeople who kept referring to it as the Type 31, not just the Arrowhead. It even had a Merlin and T31 on the flight deck. Perhaps it was PR spin on their part, as they are bidding for the T32 program and were also bidding for the indonesian and Greek frigate requirements. The model as shown had initially 8 canister launched surface to surface missiles (SSM), a 24 round Sea Ceptor silo, a 57mm gun… Read more »

Lusty
Lusty
1 month ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Interesting observations. I think it’s the mock-ups and associated announcements that pose the real crux of the issue for most people here. We have known for a while that they’ll use a 57mm/2.2″ and 40mm/1.6″ loadout for guns, the Sea Ceptor fit and a helicopter. I suspect I speak for the majority of people here when I say that we want to know how MANY Sea Ceptor silos will be fitted, whether they’ll be fitted with canisters (or if that’s an ambition) and if some DS30s will be added in the position that you mentioned. That last point isn’t a… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago
Reply to  Lusty

yep the number of Seaceptor will be interesting. As Seaceptor will have a pretty potent anti surface role ( at three time the speed of sound the warhead is not the main delivery of energy) numbers will really matter, a type 31 with only 12 missiles for AAW and Anti surface work is going to run out quickly, 24 missiles will allow for more liberal use against surface threats.

Frank62
Frank62
30 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

The 30mm seems an odd blind alley. What can it do that a 40mm can do far better & at longer range? 30mm has practically no AA ability, which is a criminal waste of deck space & topweight.

DaveyB
DaveyB
30 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Possibly, the one advantage the DS30 has over the 40, is that it can also be used manually. Which may not sound like much, but what if the ship has a electrical failure or the datalink between the CMS and weapon system is damaged? At least the DS30 can be made operational in these circumstances. I’m not totally certain, but I don’t think the 40 has a manual mode?

Gunbuster
Gunbuster
30 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Yes it has a manual mode but wear ear duffs as the noise will damage your hearing…180db impulse per round!

If you lose the cms/optical sight you go manual . If you lose main power to a 30mm it also has a 30 min battery built in that is equally important as you can keep firing whilst you rig emergency power to it. You can do a lot of jury rig cable runs in 30mins!

Last edited 30 days ago by Gunbuster
Dern
Dern
25 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

I suspect it’s also that the DS30 is in inventory and a cheap way to increase a ships close in defences.

Ron5
Ron5
30 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

That T31/Arrowhead 140 model at DSEI has been around for years. If you were really at the show you would have noticed right next to the model all the different weapons & sensor options that can be swapped in and out like Lego. The sales folks will add or remove anything you want to see.The configuration at any time means exactly nothing.

comment image

Ron5
Ron5
30 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

Someone who really did go to the show, asked the Babcock’s folk on the stand how many Sea Ceptor VLS would be fitted to the UK’s Type 31. They replied that the Navy were still deciding. I’m sure it will come down to how much money is left in the T31 budget. We were told earlier that the radar might be upgraded to a NS200 under the same conditions i.e. if money is left.

Daveyb
Daveyb
30 days ago
Reply to  Ron5

I agree, but you missed the point! When the bigwigs were coming to the stand, the Babcock people changed the configuration of the “Arrowhead/T31”. As you’ve shown in the image above, the rear mast was replaced with the module that looks like a SMART-L radar and a pair of DS30 looking guns were put on the steps either side of the hangar. As it was so crowded, I couldn’t see what other changes they made, as I was chatting with the Themis people opposite the Babcock stand. The Navy bods in particular were chatting with Babcock for a good couple… Read more »

Ron5
Ron5
29 days ago
Reply to  Daveyb

I didn’t miss your point I just thought it was really weak. Rather like the idea that the Royal Navy has to go to a show to find out Type 31 or 32 options.

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake
1 month ago

Quite frankly I am baffled, the RFA is already struggling to support the RN with its logistical requirements for arms and ammunition now they will have to carry 4.5 inch rounds, 5 inch rounds, 57mm rounds, 40 mm rounds, 30 mm round and 20mm rounds then there is the missile reloads. Why are we handicapping our selves once again instead of consolidating on 2 or 3 types of guns 5″ or 4.5″ and a 30mm or 40mm this would make the logistical support far less complicated and far cheaper.

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago

I suppose the plan is get rid of the 4.5 inch as soon as the last T23 leaves service with the 45s getting a new gun. You would imagine that at some point the lower cal guns will be changed out for 40mm. you would have to ask yourself if our T45 fleet may be better served by a fit of 57mm and 40mm to really double down on its AAW role as well as increase its self protection against swarm tactics. After all is a T45 ever going to undertaking navel gunfire support ? Now we are always planning… Read more »

Steven Alfred Rake
Steven Alfred Rake
30 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Hello Jonathan, You are right but it seems at the moment there are no plans going forward and the logistical support is an after thought!

Jonathan
Jonathan
30 days ago

Yes it does seem that way at present. Which is odd because most of the best savings come from removing a whole piece of equipment. After all it’s not just the logistic tail you can remove it’s also the training pipeline and skill set, which is always expensive to keep up and Labour intensive, especially if your struggling to retain skilled people.

criss whicker
criss whicker
30 days ago

has anyone seen the latest pictures of that amarican sub that hit something under the sea.
thought i may share this with you.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/42706/why-multi-billion-dollar-nuclear-submarines-still-run-into-things-underwater

Ron
Ron
30 days ago
Reply to  criss whicker

Ouch, that hurt. It looks like the sub could be written off. It also goes to show how strong modern subs are. As for the skipper, I don’t think he or she will get a new command.

AlexS
AlexS
30 days ago
Reply to  Ron

That is not the same sub.

Ron
Ron
30 days ago
Reply to  AlexS

My mistake, your right the photo of the damaged sub is the USS San Francisco. Thanks for the heads up.

Leedstiffer
Leedstiffer
30 days ago

I suspect that the reason for such a low armament fit on launching is that they have an eye on the future weapon systems currently being trialled such as rail guns and energy weapons. Besides, last I checked we aren’t actually at war with anyone so these ships will spend more time hosting cocktail parties, disaster relief or anti piracy patrols.

Jae
Jae
30 days ago

2 x mortars mk 10 on the quarter deck twin 4.5 gun and 2 x seacat missiles launches ..all that is needed save some money did for us we never complained

DaveC
DaveC
30 days ago

Water pistol, potatoes guns fire works and catapults to fire snowballs in colder climates when the Government realise they haven’t got the money for the full armament.

Charles Verrier
Charles Verrier
28 days ago

The T31 is supposed to be off doing low-intensity activities like drug interdiction patrols, so for that role it seems reasonable if it takes that workload off the T26. I guess the problems arise if we suddenly need to deal with a bigger crisis, and are then left scrambling to fit more stuff to every hull we have. The UK has taken risks with reduced capability as a cost saving measure, and we’ve got by (with things like the gap between Nimrod and P-8 and all the ‘for but not with’ stuff), it is a worry that one day we’ll… Read more »

Jonathan
Jonathan
27 days ago

They are not that low intensity, a medium gun, 2 modern 40mm cannon, cutting edge point/short range area defence missile, that can also act as a Mach 3 ASuW weapon, Able to take a medium rotor up to the size of a merlin, mission bays ( space for future unmanned vehicles), space for Marines and ribs. I assume the soft kill will be up to the usual RN standards. These are going to be ideal for enclosed and busy waters. Yes it’s probably important they get 24 Seaceptor, which I’m betting they will as it will give them more use… Read more »

andy reeves
andy reeves
28 days ago

EXCELLENT, NOW GET THEM THERE FRIGATES ROLLING OUT FAST.

Jon
Jon
27 days ago

I noticed the US have selected a Bofors 57mm as the main gun for its new son-of-FREMM frigate class. The same main gun as on the Type 31.

AlexS
AlexS
27 days ago
Reply to  Jon

It was already known.